Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
newamerica.org
Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
1–10 of 87 posts
Re: Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
#2Every political faction has an "idea" about UBI. That's the core of what's wrong with UBI. People don't want their income to be subject to political whims, and change every election cycle.
The problem is that, before automation, people had something to trade for their daily necessities - their work. Work was tied to each individual and that empowered people. Now, with automation, people will have nothing else to offer, but still have the same needs as before. So people lose their influence and become subjects to the whims of whomever decides the quantum of the UBI. What if they set it too low? What can a person do against the state in that case?
I have been thinking about this problem, and came to the conclusion that the only way to assure people's future is agriculture and self-reliant industry. If corporations won't hire people, people need to be "hired by the land". I see cooperatives being formed where people buy land and cultivate their own food, possibly using technology, even robotics, that is in the public domain and can be used freely.
In the long term it will be essential that AI and robotics be implemented in the public domain otherwise only the big corporations will reap the benefits of automation. Remember what happens when a concentrated source of wealth appears: with operating systems, the Windows monopoly; with search - Google; with social - FB, with oil - arab countries (where huge social problems appeared as a result). People need to be in control of their sources of income. UBI is just a promise from the state and "the 1%" that we will not be left to starve. But can we trust them? We need to become self reliant.
As a side note, a number of technologies will be essential for self reliance, such as: solar, water filtration, 3D printing, robotics & AI, agriculture (including the right to create seeds, that has been usurped recently by big corps), open & free education, generic drugs and of course open source software.
Re: Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
#3Every political faction has an "idea" about UBI. That's the core of what's wrong with UBI. People don't want their income to be subject to political whims, and change every election cycle. The problem is that, before automation, people had something to trade for their daily necessities - their work. Work was tied to each individual and that empowered people. Now, with automation, people will have nothing else to offe…
I would add that, with more widespread education and college attendance, people also expect more freedom to decide what they do with their time. From a psychological standpoint, they feel they've given themselves some authority by becoming educated and expect to be able to exercise this authority. It's hard to do this if you're forced to spend most of your time realizing someone else's dream (by working for a living) and, due to a stagnant economy, this servitude doesn't even net you enough to build a strong base.
Re: Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
#4The UBI and this article are terrible.
First of all, it's expensive. Guaranteeing every American a certain sum of money will cost a ridiculous amount.
Second, it's immoral. Taking money from one person and giving it to another by force is wrong, especially when your justification is that you think they have too much money.
Third, it's funny that he points to Social Security when it is approaching disaster. http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/ssa/social-security-reti...
Fourth, the fear mongering about automation needs to stop. Automation will not put everyone out of work and it will not spell the end of capitalism. At every stage of technological advancement, you get people, like the UBIers, who run around like chicken with their heads cut off, Luddite Fallacy. The fact is that automation makes some jobs obsolete but compensates by creating entire industries profitable. Did Software Engineering exist in 1920? No, so don't be surprised if in 20 years a new field has arisen.
I really want to stress the point about automation because I think it is the largest source of misinformation out there. In 1870, 50% of the US labor force worked in agriculture. Today guess how many? 1.2%. Why hasn't the unemployment rate skyrocketed due to the automation in agriculture that allows us to produce more crops cheaper and with less people? Because the increase in labor and decrease in food costs allowed other industries to flourish!
Re: Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
#5The UBI and this article are terrible. First of all, it's expensive. Guaranteeing every American a certain sum of money will cost a ridiculous amount. Second, it's immoral. Taking money from one person and giving it to another by force is wrong, especially when your justification is that you think they have too much money. Third, it's funny that he points to Social Security when it is approaching disaster. http://www…
Can't believe you're making the nutty "taxation is immoral" argument. We all have a say in the laws. That's why it's fair we all have to live by them. Disagree with the laws? Change them. Or in this case, argue against them ever being implemented. But you won't get far arguing taxation is immoral.
Re: Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
#6The UBI and this article are terrible. First of all, it's expensive. Guaranteeing every American a certain sum of money will cost a ridiculous amount. Second, it's immoral. Taking money from one person and giving it to another by force is wrong, especially when your justification is that you think they have too much money. Third, it's funny that he points to Social Security when it is approaching disaster. http://www…
Can't believe you're making the nutty "taxation is immoral" argument. We all have a say in the laws. That's why it's fair we all have to live by them. Disagree with the laws? Change them. Or in this case, argue against them ever being implemented. But you won't get far arguing taxation is immoral.
Not saying I agree with the "taxation is immoral" argument, but have you ever changed a law before? Not exactly a walk in the park. The effort it takes to change even small government policies should clearly show that, for the most part, nobody really has a say in what the law is.
Re: Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
#7The UBI and this article are terrible. First of all, it's expensive. Guaranteeing every American a certain sum of money will cost a ridiculous amount. Second, it's immoral. Taking money from one person and giving it to another by force is wrong, especially when your justification is that you think they have too much money. Third, it's funny that he points to Social Security when it is approaching disaster. http://www…
> Why hasn't the unemployment rate skyrocketed due to the automation in agriculture that allows us to produce more crops cheaper and with less people? Because the increase in labor and decrease in food costs allowed other industries to flourish!
The unemployment rate is still high (~9%), and thats just people still looking who haven't given up yet.
Labor force participation rate: https://i.imgur.com/v9sD9PB.png
Re: Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
#8The UBI and this article are terrible. First of all, it's expensive. Guaranteeing every American a certain sum of money will cost a ridiculous amount. Second, it's immoral. Taking money from one person and giving it to another by force is wrong, especially when your justification is that you think they have too much money. Third, it's funny that he points to Social Security when it is approaching disaster. http://www…
>Taking money from one person and giving it to another by force is wrong
Oh man. Please explain this one.
Re: Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
#9The UBI and this article are terrible. First of all, it's expensive. Guaranteeing every American a certain sum of money will cost a ridiculous amount. Second, it's immoral. Taking money from one person and giving it to another by force is wrong, especially when your justification is that you think they have too much money. Third, it's funny that he points to Social Security when it is approaching disaster. http://www…
Oh come on, we've been over all of this a hundred times here on HN.
> Second, it's immoral. Taking money from one person and giving it to another by force is wrong, especially when your justification is that you think they have too much money.
Also known as taxation, or living in a society. If you don't like money being taken from you by force then fine, just please opt out of all the services and benefits the society provides for you. This is in fact entirely doable, and it's called "renunciation of citizenship".
RE the automation angle, you're ignoring the automation quality aspect. Humans can basically provide three types of labour - physical labour, cognitive labour and social labour. The first type is already almost completely eliminated by the first wave of automation, starting with industrial revolution. Current wave of automation is making inroads in the second one. Just how many people you think we can fit in jobs which value is mostly created by the fact they're done by a human (e.g. psychologist, waitress, nanny)?
Re: Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
#10The UBI and this article are terrible. First of all, it's expensive. Guaranteeing every American a certain sum of money will cost a ridiculous amount. Second, it's immoral. Taking money from one person and giving it to another by force is wrong, especially when your justification is that you think they have too much money. Third, it's funny that he points to Social Security when it is approaching disaster. http://www…
Can't believe you're making the nutty "taxation is immoral" argument. We all have a say in the laws. That's why it's fair we all have to live by them. Disagree with the laws? Change them. Or in this case, argue against them ever being implemented. But you won't get far arguing taxation is immoral.
Reminds of the quote: "A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch."
Taxation when taken too far is immoral, regardless of the popular vote